What is a plebiscite on gay marriage
Same-sex marriage: Is a plebiscite a sure thing?
Federal Cabinet has signed off on plans to contain the same-sex marriage plebiscite on February 11, 2017.
Ministers own also agreed that the question to be put to voters will be: "Should the commandment be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?"
Is the plebiscite a done deal?
In one pos, no.
Legislation to fix up a plebiscite has not been presented to Parliament. The Coalition can pass the legislation through the Property of Representatives using its slender majority of one vote.
But it's the Senate that poses a problem.
What could arise in the Senate?
The Coalition needs to convince nine senators to support the legislation.
Labor has threatened to block the bill, with its leader Bill Shorten ramping up his warnings about a plebiscite.
"If one youngster commits suicide over the plebiscite, then that is one too many," he said.
How the Senate stacks up
It's not going to be easy for the Turnbull Government to get its agenda through the modern Senate.
The Greens and the Nick Xenophon Team of three senators have also promised to argue against it.
Crossbench senator Derryn Hinch has also ruled out his sup
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (11:29): I oppose the plebiscite because it is costly. I oppose the plebiscite because it is divisive. Most importantly, I oppose the plebiscite because it is ineffective. A plebiscite will, just as the previous speaker indicated, lead to a parliamentary bill and parliamentary motion. The previous speaker also indicated what we all know: a majority of the Australian people support marriage equality. We know that is the case. It is acknowledged that that is the case. It is overwhelming. And it is now the case that a majority of Home of Representatives members and senators, including the current Prime Minister and the Leader of the Contradiction, support marriage equality. We should get on with it and do our job.
The previous speaker also spoke about the conscience votes that we contain had in parliament on this side of the House, even though no conscience vote was allowed by those opposite. A few years ago a majority of the parliament did not support marriage equality. When I was elected in 1996, the priority of same-sex couples was certainly not having the right to marry; there were a range of other reforms that had a practical impact on their lives that
High Court of Australia finds marriage law postal survey is lawfully funded
Wilkie & Ors v The Commonwealth & Ors; Australian Marriage Equality Ltd & Anor v Minister for Finance & Anor [2017] HCA 40 (M105/M106 of 2017)
Summary
In M105/M106, the Lofty Court dismissed two legal challenges to the Government’s plan to carry out a voluntary postal survey on whether the regulation should be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry. The plaintiffs challenged the survey on the basis that it was not lawfully funded.
Facts
Since late-2016, senior members of the Federal Government expressed the view that despite conflict from the Senate, the Government remained committed to a policy of conducting a plebiscite on the question of same-sex marriage and “giving the Australian people the opportunity to pass judgment on this issue”.
In March 2017, senior members of Government said that a non-legislated voluntary postal vote or postal plebiscite had been proposed as one option for delivering on this promise , though the Government’s policy remained to conduct a compulsory-attendance plebiscite on this issue.
In August 2017 the Senate reje
Explained: The same-sex marriage plebiscite
It is an issue that has divided the Coalition. After a marathon, seven-hour partyroom meeting in August last year, the Liberal and National parties voted to take the issue of legalising same-sex marriage to a national poll.
Since then, it has develop the proverbial political steamy potato. And an overpriced one at that, costing about $160 million.
That has angered many advocates of same-sex marriage, who debate the debate over the merits of allowing homosexual couples to marry will be full of vitriol and will denigrate their relationships.
Proponents of the status quo maintain such a landmark change to the definition of marriage should be put to the people, rather than organism decided within the Parliament.
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull took a plebiscite to the election — a free vote in Parliament is not on the cards.
How do we get to a plebiscite?
Politicians first require to pass legislation to enable a plebiscite, which will — as ABC election guru Anthony Grassy writes — invoke the provisions of the electoral and referendum acts.
The legislation would specify the way in which the ballot would be handled, and most importantly the questio
NATIONAL RESULTS
Response
Should the law be changed to allow lgbtq+ couples to marry?
Of the eligible Australians who expressed a view on this question, the majority indicated that the law should be changed to permit same-sex couples to marry, with 7,817,247 (61.6%) responding Yes and 4,873,987 (38.4%) responding No. Nearly 8 out of 10 eligible Australians (79.5%) expressed their view.
All states and territories recorded a majority Yes response. 133 of the 150 Federal Electoral Divisions recorded a majority Yes response, and 17 of the 150 Federal Electoral Divisions recorded a majority No response.
Further information on response and participation within each express and territory is available through the menu.
| State/Territory | Yes | No | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no. | Yes % | no. | No % | no. | % | |
| New South Wales | 2,374,362 | 57.8 | 1,736,838 | 42.2 | 4,111,200 | 100 |
| Victoria | 2,145,629 | 64.9 | 1,161,098 | 35.1 | 3,306,727 | 100 |
| Queensland | 1,487,060 | 60.7 | 961,015 | 39.3 | 2,448,075 | 100 |
| South Australia | 592,528 | 62.5 | 356,247 | 37.5 | 948,775 | 100 |
| Western Australia | 801,575 | 63.7 | 455,924 | 36.3 | 1,257,499 | 100 |
| Tasmania | 191,948 | 63.6 | 109,655 | 36.4 | 301,603 | 100 |
| Northern | ||||||